Sociology 201: Criminology 2nd Meeting

[drgrissom.livejournal.com]

Hello, class. Please take a seat. I hope you are working on your reading for next Monday.

Grissom gives an introductory lecture, and hands out lecture notes

As a class exercise, I would like you to do the following -

Outlined in the lecture are 9 different types of crime. Please refer to the chart in the middle of the packet for more details. I would like for you to rank them in order of what you believe to be the worst type of crime, to the least.

Crimes against the state
Crimes against persons
Crimes against habitation
Crimes against property
Crimes against public order
Crimes against administration of justice
Crimes against public morals
Crimes against nature
Crimes against environment

Your participation will be noted, and discussion is anticipated.



Partner List for Class

lauraholt & _steele_
cameronmitchell & whitedeathpod
rosefern_todd & maias_notebook

chloe_sullivan, timothy_drake, darkchylde_, call_me_red_ac and emo_knight do not yet have partners. I will assign them randomly on Monday if you do not choose your own. If you are not on this list but want to take this class, let me know immediately and I will add you to the roster.

Comments

Chloe's list

[mycanonhatesme]

Crimes against persons
Crimes against the state
Crimes against public morals
Crimes against public order
Crimes against administration of justice
Crimes against property
Crimes against habitation
Crimes against nature
Crimes against environment

As for my class partner, I don't really have a preference, so if there's anyone else who doesn't either, we could probably work together.

Re: Chloe's list

[drgrissom.livejournal.com]

That's fine, Chloe. Perhaps Angela would like to work with you, she is new in class today.

As for your list, interesting analysis. I can see similarities and differences with your classmates' lists which I find intriguing. Thank you.

Re: Chloe's list

[mycanonhatesme]

*smiles to Angela* That would be great.

Re: Chloe's list

[chasingangela]

That's fine with me. Thanks, Chloe.

Um, I guess my list would be:


Crimes against persons
Crimes against habitation
Crimes against property
Crimes against public order
Crimes against environment
Crimes against administration of justice
Crimes against nature
Crimes against the state
Crimes against public morals

Re: Chloe's list

[drgrissom.livejournal.com]

Thank you for participating in this class period, Angela. I am encouraged you have caught up so quickly. If I may be of any more assistance, let me know. Good work.

Re: Chloe's list

[cameronmitchell.livejournal.com]

Can I ask, why person above state? I saw Crichton had the same.

Re: Chloe's list

[whitedeathpod.livejournal.com]

Those two were actually the hardest to rank for me. Because, in my opinion, they almost coexist.

State usually houses (for lack of better term) person and persons make up the state. Crimes against one usually affect the other.

Re: Chloe's list

[cameronmitchell.livejournal.com]

*nods* I think in the end I went with state first because I reasoned that if the state gets compromised, there is no one to protect the individual. But yeah, without citizens there is no state to begin with.

Re: Chloe's list

[whitedeathpod.livejournal.com]

Yep. It's hard to rank one in front of the other because they go hand in hand. Without state, the citizens are unprotected and could descend into something like anarchy without a government or something similar to set guidelines.

Without citizens, there is no military, industry, or commericialism that the state thrives on.

Re: Chloe's list

[cameronmitchell.livejournal.com]

*agrees and admires your brains*

Re: Chloe's list

[whitedeathpod.livejournal.com]

*smiles and loves it when Cam shows his smarts*

Re: Chloe's list

[mycanonhatesme]

If I could have put them on the same line, I probably would have, but I don't think that's an option. Crimes against both can be equally bad, but in the end, I put persons above state because crimes against individual persons are far more common than crimes committed against the whole state, so collectively, that makes it worse.

Re: Chloe's list

[cameronmitchell.livejournal.com]

*nods* That's another way of looking at it. But wouldn't you say that an attack on an individul affects only one person while an attack on the state can have an impact on a lot of people, if not an entire nation?

Re: Chloe's list

[mycanonhatesme]

Yeah, that's true. The number of people affected depends on how "state" is defined, but no matter what, yeah, that's a lot of people.

Re: Chloe's list

[cameronmitchell.livejournal.com]

I suppose in the end, it both sucks.

Re: Chloe's list

[mycanonhatesme]

Definitely. And we can certainly agree that they both belong at the top.

Re: Chloe's list

[cameronmitchell.livejournal.com]

I do. I can see enough reasons for either to go on top. I was just wondering if maybe I missed another reason why you all picked person over state.